--
: Christopher R. Hertel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
: 200341 15:29
: Aladdin Cai(_
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Re: ???`: ??: When the keep-alive packet sent out,rfc1002 says different
things!!
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 01:33:14PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
:
Hello Buck,
Buck Huppmann wrote:
i'm also seeing some aberrant ACL-setting behavior in samba 2.2.8. more-
over, the new Creator Owner and Creator Group semantics are bewildering,
although i can understand if, in that sense, they're just mimicking NT
behavior all the more closely. at any rate,
Compiling lib/adt_tree.c
lib/adt_tree.c: In function `sorted_tree_destroy':
lib/adt_tree.c:114: structure has no member named `_free_leap'
make: *** [lib/adt_tree.o] Error 1
Cheers,
Waider.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / Yes, it /is/ very personal of me.
Junk food is considered part of the vegetable
Greetings,
add share command,delete share command and change
share command are three parameters of smb.conf which I
am trying to use.Samba sources has example script
modify_samba_config.pl which can be used for addition
and deletion of share .but which script can be used
for change share command
On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 23:41, Ronan Waide wrote:
Compiling lib/adt_tree.c
lib/adt_tree.c: In function `sorted_tree_destroy':
lib/adt_tree.c:114: structure has no member named `_free_leap'
make: *** [lib/adt_tree.o] Error 1
It's due to dmalloc() using a CPP define to do the work. Adding some
Hello,
I would like to mount a home directory UNIX on my PC. I use a server for samba. And I
try to have an authentification with a server ldap (IPlanet product). But I can recive
an authentification.
Could you help me, please.
Thanks
/Olivier
my smb.conf file:
=
[global]
On April 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 23:41, Ronan Waide wrote:
Compiling lib/adt_tree.c
lib/adt_tree.c: In function `sorted_tree_destroy':
lib/adt_tree.c:114: structure has no member named `_free_leap'
make: *** [lib/adt_tree.o] Error 1
It's due to dmalloc() using
Hi,
I'm trying to build alpha 23 on a debian machine here for a worker.
Everything compiles great, and Active Directory option is enabled.
However, after installing the build, trying to do: net ads join - gives me the
message that net is not build with ADS support...
I checked the
Hi Oliver,
please send this question to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
samba-technical is for developer dicussion only.
metze
At 14:32 01.04.2003 +0200, Olivier Studer wrote:
Hello,
I would like to mount a home directory UNIX on my PC. I use a server for
samba. And I try to have an authentification with a
I'm looking for some assistance regarding file permissions and the inability
to stop the execution of a file even though the execute permission has not
been set.
Scenario
I create a share.
I copy the notepad.exe from a windows client onto the share.
From Linux console:
chown user notepad.exe
On April 1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I'm looking for some assistance regarding file permissions and the inability
to stop the execution of a file even though the execute permission has not
been set.
Execute bits are a Unix concept. Windows will execute any file it can
read that it understands
what is the difficulty upgrading in your environment, just curios
-Original Message-
From: dowlime [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 1:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Request - security patch for 2.0.6
Is there a plan for a patch for 2.0.6 to address the
Nick,
Perhaps you can explain how you would achieve your goals if the server was
running Windows 2000 Server. If you can demonstrate a pure Windows
solution maybe we could match that with Samba.
- John T.
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Nick Drouet wrote:
I'm looking for some assistance regarding file
[EMAIL PROTECTED] source]# smbclient //server/print\$ -U admin%passwd -Tc
Error opening local file //server/print$ - No such file or directory
It's picking up the share name as the tar file name. Even specifying a
filename after -Tc doesn't work. Sneaking tar.out in as the first
parameter doesn't
Compiling rpc_server/srv_spoolss_nt.c
rpc_server/srv_spoolss_nt.c: In function `open_printer_hnd':
rpc_server/srv_spoolss_nt.c:512: structure has no member named `ctx'
make: *** [rpc_server/srv_spoolss_nt.o] Error 1
Looks like something from 3_0 crept in... that version does define a member ctx
Hi Tony,
Another workaround would be to populate an smbpasswd file with all the names
from your /etc/passwd file.
But I realize this can be onerous. Samba has a script to help with this,
mksmbpasswd.sh
since you won't be needing passwords from this smbpasswd file, this would do
it for you, I
Hi Brad,
We have noticed an extra open on files when you
have 'map share modes = yes' in the smb.conf file;
This causes a problem with deleting a file that you
own IF the unix permissions are 0700. At least that's the
symptom that came in for us; perhaps your tmp file issue is
related.
Can you
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Ronan Waide wrote:
On April 1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I'm looking for some assistance regarding file permissions and the inability
to stop the execution of a file even though the execute permission has not
been set.
Execute bits are a Unix concept. Windows will
On April 1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hmmm, I did some testing a week or so ago, and found that removing the
execute permission from ACLs on the file (esp inherited ones) prevents
Win2K from executing the file, although it does open the file for read
first.
Yep, turns out I opened my mouth
Hi guys!
After upgrading from alpha22 to alpha23, I immediately started having
printing problems. After looking to the logs, I was able to find that
something definitely changed. Maybe some files moved to another place?
Can you take a look?
In my /var/log/messages file this poped up:
Apr 1
That's highly undesirable, as it breaks single-signon
(unless you're an NT-cenric organization, which Sun isn't (:-))
--dave
|Hi Tony,
|Another workaround would be to populate an smbpasswd file with all the names
|
|from your /etc/passwd file.
|But I realize this can be onerous. Samba has a
Hi Dave,
yeah, not pretty - should be fixed in the code. Just looking for a
workaround that might be less undesireable than security = share (which
was one of the options he was looking at in a private message to me).
The point really is that we shouldn't even be LOOKING in the smbpasswd
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Jim McDonough wrote:
Hmmm, I did some testing a week or so ago, and found that removing the
execute permission from ACLs on the file (esp inherited ones) prevents
Win2K from executing the file, although it does open the file for read
first.
Doesn't happen for me. It lets
Samba-folk:
I have an Active Directory with SUPTRA at the top and 2 other AD
servers, KAMA and CAMP.
If Samba joins KAMA, it can authenticate against KAMA and/or SUPTRA, but
not CAMP. wbinfo -u shows users from all 3 servers, but wbinfo -m only
shows SUPTRA.
KAMA and CAMP have an implicit
On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 10:19, MCCALL,DON (HP-USA,ex1) wrote:
Hi Brad,
We have noticed an extra open on files when you
have 'map share modes = yes' in the smb.conf file;
This causes a problem with deleting a file that you
own IF the unix permissions are 0700. At least that's the
symptom that
Oops, Brad;
sorry - just noticed this is on 3.0; my problem is at 2.2.5 on
HPUX
with the map share modes parameter,
not the 'share modes' parameter.
Don
-Original Message-
From: Bradley W. Langhorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 11:37
To: MCCALL,DON
You should note that the ACL system and the Unix permission bits are two
different things. What you are actually talking about is the translation
between the two.
If the ACL system has Execute permission set for the user, then that user
should be able to execute the program on the client. That
What is Windows is using to determine that it needs to do the
executability test? There is no executable bit in Windows. There is the
ACL entry, but nothing at the DOS level. That is, unless they are testing
the file extension.
What Windows would need is a marker that enables a file for
What is Windows is using to determine that it needs to do the
executability test? There is no executable bit in Windows. There is the
ACL entry, but nothing at the DOS level. That is, unless they are testing
the file extension.
It uses the ACL. It follows locally what's in the ACL, and the
-Original Message-
From: Jim McDonough [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The unix x bit is a perfectly
reasonable place to
store this, and unix has the same problems windows does...if
you can read
it, you can copy it and change the bits in your own copy.
Isn't the UNIX x bit already
Folks,
I am updating the Samba documentation in the HEAD and 3.0.0 branches
today.
If anyone has either documentation notes that they wish to contribute _or_
has constructive comments please email them to me direct at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
as soon as you can.
Later today (in about 5 hours time) I
Perhaps you're thinking of the setuid/setgid/sticky bits. This is why I
referred the question to Jeremy Allison. He (literally) wrote the book on
this. I'd quote from his CIFS presentation, but I can't find it online, and
I don't have my copy with me.
There should also be some consideration of
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 02:54:27PM +0200, Michael Steffens wrote:
From my understanding Samba has no other choice than inserting missing
object ACEs, because it's impossible to set a POSIX ACL without. The
crucial point not being whether, but what to insert. What does the
client intend when
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 06:01:54PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
:
Ethereal is recommended, if only because the rest of us know how to read
it...
^^ Thanks, I will download it and try.Is it more powerful than NAI
sniffer? NAI sniffer will treat a packet simply beginning
Just a note... something I figured out while working on my book.
There was a complaint a while back (a long while, possibly) that the
datagram service--the MSBrowse Protocol in particular--did not respond to
the correct port. If, for example, a client opens a high-numbered UDP
port to send a
35 matches
Mail list logo
